|
For simplicity and ease of play I just used 1 initiative placing for the hazards, just replacing each one with the next when the time came and continuing initiative where it was.
It seemed the only sane/reasonable way to handle it.
According to the scenario pdf:
2nd Haunt - Haunted by Chains/Hunted by Duty's Bonds: Routine (two actions)
3rd Haunt - Scaling the Chain/Ascending the Chain: Routine (three actions)
Given the lack of updates here. We can assume any Foundry discrepancies post November 2024 are in error.
|
|
I just DMed this and found a couple of odd things. All concern the three hazards in the second part of the adventure:
1. How is this supposed to be handled? Is the switchover from one hazard to the next a new encounter, i.e. everyone rolls a new initiative? Or will the new hazard be inserted into initiative in the current encounter?
2. The second and third hazard are inconsistent when it comes to number of actions. At least in the Foundry Module, the second one is listed with two actions, but the routine says three, while the third one is the other way round. Which numbers are correct?
What do you mean by its listed with x actions vs the routine?
The statblocks I have reflect what Pirate Rob called out from the PDF. I do not have the pdf but curious where you are seeing actions called out elsewhere in the Foundry module. I do not see anything in the journals etc.
|
|
You have to remember that haunts don't get 3 actions by default. They get a number of actions that their routine tells them.
So Haunt number 2, has 2 actions, and each time it acts it targets 3 random creatures. One disable leaves it 1 action, and 2 disables destroys it.
Haunt number 3 has 3 actions. Each time it acts is targets 2 random creatures. Each disable reduces those actions by one etc.
---
Lots of people miss this, including occasionally authors, so one has to be very careful reading haunts and sorting out what they are actually supposed to be doing. (There's an intro scenario with a nasty hazard that's listed as "(three actions)" that should clearly only be once a round, and is scary enough as is, and would be unreasonably deadly if it actually happened 3 times a round. {2d6+2 x3 damage vs the entire party of level 1/2 PCs})
Routine This entry describes what a complex hazard does on each of its turns during an encounter; the number in parentheses after the word “Routine” indicates how many actions the hazard can use each turn. Simple hazards don't have this entry.
Venture-Agent, Ohio—Columbus
|
You have to remember that haunts don't get 3 actions by default. They get a number of actions that their routine tells them.
So Haunt number 2, has 2 actions, and each time it acts it targets 3 random creatures. One disable leaves it 1 action, and 2 disables destroys it.
Haunt number 3 has 3 actions. Each time it acts is targets 2 random creatures. Each disable reduces those actions by one etc.
I ran this scenario last weekend. I ran it as you state above (meaning each round sees 6 attacks versus the PCs, before any disables). It wasn't too bad until the 3rd haunt, where the requirement to climb above the plane of light before attempting to disable really screwed the party. Was a near TPK, though they did pull it out in the end. I don't think the writer meant for it to be as difficult as it was, which makes me believe the writer (and or editor) didn't understand how haunts work.
|
Has anyone had to handle a case where no one in the group had the skills to disable the Talhinder’s Grief haunt?
Seems like it could easily happen, especially considering how random Society parties tend to be. Since the haunts have no hit points or AC it isn’t like swinging a sword will deal with it. The hazard requires Trained in all of the skills useful for disabling it.
|
|
I guess it depends on how you read it.
Disable DC 17 Performance (trained) to overpower the frightening cries with a greater sound or DC 15 Occultism or Religion (trained) to ritually disrupt the haunting.
I read it as both Occultism and Religion needing to be trained, but now that you mention it an equally valid reading may be only Religion needs to be trained and Occultism can be used Untrained. Depends on how you interpret the trained requirement.
The only Untrained action for Occultism is Recall Knowledge. Not sure just recalling knowledge is good enough to know how to disrupt the haunting, but since it avoids a group potentially not having a way to deal with the Haunt I will take that interpretation.
Thanks for the response!
|
Venture-Captain, Washington—Seattle
|
Disable DC 17 Performance (trained) to overpower the frightening cries with a greater sound or DC 15 Occultism or Religion (trained) to ritually disrupt the haunting.Is Occultism required to be trained?
Agree that from a practical point of view, if that's the only way the party can try to disable the hazard, then it's probably a good idea to take the reading that Occultism can be untrained.
But just for fun let's see if we can dig up some evidence to support that view. The stat block for hazards does have a fixed editorial style so we can look for cases where 2 or more skills are explicitly suffixed with their own proficiency, despite being of the same required proficiency, listed for the same "to clause" (where by "to clause" I mean the clause containing the verb phrase starting with "to", which describes what you're doing, such as "to ritually disrupt the haunting"). This is relatively infrequent, but we do see a few examples -
DC 20 Survival (trained) or Occultism (trained) to breathe pockets of safe air trapped in bags and clothing
DC 43 Athletics (master), Crafting (master), or Engineering Lore (master) to brace the structure to reduce the risk of collapse until the end of the creature's next turn
DC 52 Arcana (legendary) or Occultism (legendary) to undo the magical manifestation of the rift [...] DC 55 Diplomacy (legendary) or Religion (legendary) to plead with Ebeshra to close the rift
DC 40 Thievery (master) or DC 35 Religion (master) four times to obliterate each of the four key runes
DC 50 Performance (legendary) or DC 53 Deception (legendary) to momentarily divert Mogaru's attention
Now, it's entirely possible that these examples simply happen to be written and/or edited by one person whose understanding of the style is at odds with everyone else's. But the existence of these examples might lend some small support to the reading that the listed proficiency should apply only to the skill it's listed immediately after, or at the very least that someone at Paizo believed that to be true (at some point in time).